4 ms·

This kind of thing is just amazing to me as an American. I'm an atheist, but people have a fundamental right to express their personal values in their dress and

This kind of thing is just amazing to me as an American. I'm an atheist, but people have a fundamental right to express their personal values in their dress and practice their religion. France's bans on religious expression in the name of "secularism" are just a different kind of theocracy.

nugget 10y ago
What happens when the "practice of religion" results in the oppression of minority rights (often within the religion itself) or cult like behaviors? Tolerance is an important value but must we be tolerant of extreme intolerance?
- panglott 10y ago
  If religious practices cause actual harm to other people, that's a reasonable cause for state intervention. But as far as I can see, this is about people who to wear a certain kind of hat or style of swimsuit. How is that conceivably an actual harm against other people?
  - harperlee 10y ago
    I believe that preventing the tension buildup that leads to violence is a reasonable cause for state intervention. The ban of the burkini is a misguided attempt to alleviate that tension. Although this is very sad to write, nowadays in France being very publicly muslim increases that tension. Using burkinis that contrast your being covered whilst the rest of the people on the beach/pool are semi-naked is included in being very publicly muslim. Also, there is a big element of context in this article. See my comment at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12352798 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12352798.
    - dragonwriter 10y ago
      > The ban of the burkini is a misguided attempt to alleviate that tension. Its so badly and obviously misguided as a technique to that intent that it is simply implausible that that is the actual intent, specifically in that it does the exact opposite, and that it is transparently obvious that it would do so, and that even if you might excuse someone for failing to recognize this in a vacuum, the fact that a number of similar previous bans have been both proposed and implemented in Europe, and France specifically, with wide media coverage and the same counterproductive effect makes it impossible to believe any policy maker anywhere in France (or, on Earth for that matter) could, other than through willful ignorance, be unaware of the likely effect.
      - harperlee 10y ago
        So then willful ignorance must be the reason. But I'd bet it also has on political points with the right wing part of the electorate...
      - mywittyname 10y ago
        It's almost like France is actively encouraging terrorist attacks by giving fundamentalist groups ammunition for recruitment and radicalization. These stories of oppression spread throughout the world and we know they are used by groups like ISIS to spread their message.
harperlee 10y ago
The climate is tense. Earlier this month, there was a stampede of hundreds, that ended up with several people in the hospital. The reason? Some german girls made a flashmob, as they had been doing it for years - but this time people thought that it was another terrorist attack [1]. There need to be limits, and while it is very difficult for everyone to agree on where they stand, and easy for us to mock the "Leaders need to do SOMETHING!", they only have so many tools to try and improve the situation. Banning the burkini is one of them (that I don't find particularly useful, but anyway). Once burkini has been banned, you can respect the law and/or protest against it. If you choose to protest it with civil disobedience, you go to the beach and refuse to leave, this is going to happen. So this woman might have decided along the way that it was better to take some clothes off than to leave, or perhaps she was fined and was trying to talk herself out of it. Who knows? We lack sufficient information. But I don't think it is justified to classify this as "police forcingly undress and shame woman", and make the moral parallel with islamic police making women cover themselves. Pkgundert's comment (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12352409 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12352409) gives some reasons. You could also read that and cynically say that France is here also practicing tyranny. The fact is that the context of this news is that France is in state of emergency, and this woman chose to practice civil disobedience in Nice barely a month after the Nice attack. For comparison, as you say you are american: ranked against all terrorist attacks in USA [2], Nice would end up ranking 3rd or 4th. Perhaps that's what the terrorists want. But the fact is that the tension is already there, and there would have been problems even without the police: >“The saddest thing was that people were shouting ‘go home’, some were applauding the police,” she said. “Her daughter was crying.” [1] http://www.politico.eu/article/german-tourists-prank-triggers-panic-on-catalan-coast-platja-daro-catalonia/ http://www.politico.eu/article/german-tourists-prank-trigger... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States#Deadliest_attacks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States...
belorn 10y ago
Practically every country has some kind of laws that limit what clothing people choose. Nudism culture, to take a obvious one, has been in constant conflict with laws that restrict the fundamental right to express personal values through clothing choice. Thus I don't know if its fair then to call every country a kind of theocracies, through I guess cultural values is very much intertwined with religious values.
spriggan3 10y ago
> but people have a fundamental right to express their personal values in their dress and practice their religion Yes, like the fundamental right to wear saggy pants in some american cities ... where they are outlawed. I'm amused every time Americans boast about being living in land of freedom ,when your government is as despotic as the rest. I certainly don't want my country to turn into that racially divided & violent country that is US.
- mywittyname 10y ago
  > Yes, like the fundamental right to wear saggy pants in some american cities ... where they are outlawed. Actually, our (lower) courts have ruled that these laws are unconstitutional. So yes, Americans have the fundamental freedom to wear burkinis and baggy pants. So, while small, local governments are free to enact repressive laws, Americans have the luxury of being protected by pro-liberty groups that will come in and fight against laws that violate the constitution.
  - spriggan3 10y ago
    Your pro-liberty groups apparently didn't prevent America from becoming this racist nation. Take care of your black community instead of boasting about your moral superiority. We don't kill black people for the sake of it here.
    - mywittyname 10y ago
      I think I see where our difference is: I don't support the moral atrocities that occur in my country and actively protest them. While you do support the oppression of others, then justify it by claiming that worse things happen in other countries.
      - spriggan3 10y ago
        > While you do support the oppression of others, I never said I supported anything. On the other hand you are quick at forgetting our own moral bankruptcy when it comes to the treatment of minorities in your own country,especially black people. It's easier to point fingers at France than to fix the situation in US. And we don't have the death penalty either. Only barbaric countries allow their states to put its citizens to death. You're not even the pot calling the kettle black, you're worse than that.

nugget 10y ago

What happens when the "practice of religion" results in the oppression of minority rights (often within the religion itself) or cult like behaviors? Tolerance is an important value but must we be tolerant of extreme intolerance?

panglott 10y ago
If religious practices cause actual harm to other people, that's a reasonable cause for state intervention. But as far as I can see, this is about people who to wear a certain kind of hat or style of swimsuit. How is that conceivably an actual harm against other people?
- harperlee 10y ago
  I believe that preventing the tension buildup that leads to violence is a reasonable cause for state intervention. The ban of the burkini is a misguided attempt to alleviate that tension. Although this is very sad to write, nowadays in France being very publicly muslim increases that tension. Using burkinis that contrast your being covered whilst the rest of the people on the beach/pool are semi-naked is included in being very publicly muslim. Also, there is a big element of context in this article. See my comment at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12352798 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12352798.
  - dragonwriter 10y ago
    > The ban of the burkini is a misguided attempt to alleviate that tension. Its so badly and obviously misguided as a technique to that intent that it is simply implausible that that is the actual intent, specifically in that it does the exact opposite, and that it is transparently obvious that it would do so, and that even if you might excuse someone for failing to recognize this in a vacuum, the fact that a number of similar previous bans have been both proposed and implemented in Europe, and France specifically, with wide media coverage and the same counterproductive effect makes it impossible to believe any policy maker anywhere in France (or, on Earth for that matter) could, other than through willful ignorance, be unaware of the likely effect.
    - harperlee 10y ago
      So then willful ignorance must be the reason. But I'd bet it also has on political points with the right wing part of the electorate...
    - mywittyname 10y ago
      It's almost like France is actively encouraging terrorist attacks by giving fundamentalist groups ammunition for recruitment and radicalization. These stories of oppression spread throughout the world and we know they are used by groups like ISIS to spread their message.

harperlee 10y ago

The climate is tense. Earlier this month, there was a stampede of hundreds, that ended up with several people in the hospital. The reason? Some german girls made a flashmob, as they had been doing it for years - but this time people thought that it was another terrorist attack [1]. There need to be limits, and while it is very difficult for everyone to agree on where they stand, and easy for us to mock the "Leaders need to do SOMETHING!", they only have so many tools to try and improve the situation. Banning the burkini is one of them (that I don't find particularly useful, but anyway). Once burkini has been banned, you can respect the law and/or protest against it. If you choose to protest it with civil disobedience, you go to the beach and refuse to leave, this is going to happen. So this woman might have decided along the way that it was better to take some clothes off than to leave, or perhaps she was fined and was trying to talk herself out of it. Who knows? We lack sufficient information. But I don't think it is justified to classify this as "police forcingly undress and shame woman", and make the moral parallel with islamic police making women cover themselves. Pkgundert's comment (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12352409 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12352409) gives some reasons. You could also read that and cynically say that France is here also practicing tyranny. The fact is that the context of this news is that France is in state of emergency, and this woman chose to practice civil disobedience in Nice barely a month after the Nice attack. For comparison, as you say you are american: ranked against all terrorist attacks in USA [2], Nice would end up ranking 3rd or 4th. Perhaps that's what the terrorists want. But the fact is that the tension is already there, and there would have been problems even without the police: >“The saddest thing was that people were shouting ‘go home’, some were applauding the police,” she said. “Her daughter was crying.” [1] http://www.politico.eu/article/german-tourists-prank-triggers-panic-on-catalan-coast-platja-daro-catalonia/ http://www.politico.eu/article/german-tourists-prank-trigger... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States#Deadliest_attacks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States...

belorn 10y ago

Practically every country has some kind of laws that limit what clothing people choose. Nudism culture, to take a obvious one, has been in constant conflict with laws that restrict the fundamental right to express personal values through clothing choice. Thus I don't know if its fair then to call every country a kind of theocracies, through I guess cultural values is very much intertwined with religious values.

spriggan3 10y ago

> but people have a fundamental right to express their personal values in their dress and practice their religion Yes, like the fundamental right to wear saggy pants in some american cities ... where they are outlawed. I'm amused every time Americans boast about being living in land of freedom ,when your government is as despotic as the rest. I certainly don't want my country to turn into that racially divided & violent country that is US.

mywittyname 10y ago
> Yes, like the fundamental right to wear saggy pants in some american cities ... where they are outlawed. Actually, our (lower) courts have ruled that these laws are unconstitutional. So yes, Americans have the fundamental freedom to wear burkinis and baggy pants. So, while small, local governments are free to enact repressive laws, Americans have the luxury of being protected by pro-liberty groups that will come in and fight against laws that violate the constitution.
- spriggan3 10y ago
  Your pro-liberty groups apparently didn't prevent America from becoming this racist nation. Take care of your black community instead of boasting about your moral superiority. We don't kill black people for the sake of it here.
  - mywittyname 10y ago
    I think I see where our difference is: I don't support the moral atrocities that occur in my country and actively protest them. While you do support the oppression of others, then justify it by claiming that worse things happen in other countries.
    - spriggan3 10y ago
      > While you do support the oppression of others, I never said I supported anything. On the other hand you are quick at forgetting our own moral bankruptcy when it comes to the treatment of minorities in your own country,especially black people. It's easier to point fingers at France than to fix the situation in US. And we don't have the death penalty either. Only barbaric countries allow their states to put its citizens to death. You're not even the pot calling the kettle black, you're worse than that.